Group size,controllability of group membership,and comparative dimension as determinants of intergroup discrimination

We expected that, when group members cannot control their group membership, majority members show ingroup favouritism on task-relevant dimension, whereas minority members were expected to show ingroup favouritism on task-irrelevant dimension (hypothesis I) In addition, it was expected that intergroup comparisons will change when group membership changes from uncontrollable to controllable. Based on Social Identity Theory, two alternative hypotheses were explored: Compared with uncontrollable settings, ingroup bias will decrease (2a) or increase (2b) in controllable settings. Ninety-two subjects were divided into four groups (minority versus majority, controllable versus uncontrollable group membership), allegedly on the basis of their essay writing style. The results supported the first hypothesis. Hypothesis 2a received support among the majority members and hypothesis 2b among the minority members. The findings are discussed in terms of Social Identity Theory and the effect the perceived control of group membership and the dimension may have on intergroup comparisons.     

From majority to minority and vice versa: the asymmetrical effects of losing and gaining majority position within a group

Two studies examined the effects of stable, partially changed, and completely changed majority and minority positions within a group on perception and evaluation of the group. It was hypothesized that loss of majority position (majority-to-minority change) would have stronger effects than gain of majority position (minority-to-majority change). The hypothesized asymmetrical effect was demonstrated in that loss of majority position decreased perception of group-self similarity, group attraction, and expectations for positive interactions with the group, whereas a corresponding gain of position did not increase them. Thus immediately following changes, the group is especially fragile because disintegrative forces created by the loss of majority position are stronger than integrative forces created by the gain of majority position.     

The ironic effect of national identification on support for collective action

Previous research has suggested that dual and superordinate identities are not only prerequisites of collective action among minority group members but they can also be associated with greater acceptance of the ingroup's disadvantaged position. In this three‐wave study among Ingrian Finnish migrants from Russia to Finland (N=153_T1?85_T3), we tested the indirect association between superordinate national identification (T1) and support for collective action (T3), via perceived permeability of group boundaries (T2). Support for collective action was operationalized as one's personal willingness, and the perceived need of the Russian‐speaking community, to engage in it. When controlling for the direct association between Russian minority identification and support for collective action, perceived permeability was shown to mediate the negative association between Finnish national identification and support for community's collective action. Thus, being close to the majority may make immigrants perceive group boundaries as more permeable and be less inclined to improve their group's position.     

The effects of social change within a group on membership preferences: to leave or not to leave?

Two studies examined immediate (Study 1) and long-term (Study 2) behavioral consequences of previously documented asymmetries in cognitive and evaluative reactions to change in majority and minority positions within a group. Study 1 found an overall decrease in preferences for group membership immediately following change, which was preceded by decategorization and devaluation of the group in response to loss, together with lack of categorization and positive evaluation in response to gain of the majority position. Study 2 found a gradual increase in preference to stay with (vs. exit) the group among former minorities with prolonged interactions that confirmed their gained majority position. A gradual increase in preference for group membership was paralleled with gradual increases in perception of both inclusion within and differentiation from the group.     

Minority influence: The effect of majority reactionaries and defectors,and minority and majority compromisers,upon majority opinion and attraction

The effects of shifting opinions within a group upon majority opinion, communication between members and perceived attractiveness of other members were studied. Each subject perceived himself to be a member of the majority in a group whose opinion was divided 6–2 on an important issue. But later one to three group members changed their vote. Six conditions of change were established: Control, majority reactionary, majority compromise, majority defection (5-3), minority compromise, minority compromise plus majority reactionary. Only majority compromise or defection affected majority opinion (private and public). Majority members were disliked when they deviated from majority opinion, but particularly so when they shifted toward minority opinion. Minority members were liked most when they induced a majority member to compromise (but not defect). Majority communication to minority occurred most when the minority was compromising, but most disagreement with minority opinion was expressed when a majority member had either compromised or defected.     

Ethnocultural identification and naturally occurring interethnic social interactions: Muslim minorities in Europe

This study examined relationships between ethnic identification and ethnic minority members' interactions with majority group members. Members of Muslim minority groups, ethnic Turks and Moroccans in the Netherlands and Chechens in Poland, described the social interactions they had for two weeks using a variant of the Rochester Interaction Record (RIR). They also completed measures of ethnocultural identification that distinguished involvement with and attachment to their ethnic minority culture and to the majority culture. Relationships between ethnic identification and contact with the majority group varied as a function of the dimension and source of identification and the aspect of interaction (quantity or quality) being considered. Across the samples, involvement with the ethnic minority culture was negatively related to the quantity of contact with majority group members, whereas emotional attachment to the majority culture was positively related to the quality of interactions with majority group members. Attachment to the ethnic minority culture was not related to either the quantity of interaction with majority group members or to the quality of these interactions. These results suggest that when studying interethnic contact, it is important to distinguish different dimensions and sources of ethnic identification and different aspects of interethnic contact. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social Identity and Intergroup Conflict

This paper explores why people identify with social groups and what this identification signifies for their sense of self, status in society and intergroup conflict. We describe various theories of social identity to elucidate ways in which individuals can negotiate their different social identities, and what this means for intergroup relations. We consider the implications for both majority and minority group members, and those from high and low status groups. We show that social identification is an essential part of an individual’s social existence, and that such identification is inextricably related to intergroup conflict. While overarching common identities have been hailed as a possible panacea for conflict, we demonstrate that such identities have differential effects for minority and majority group members. There is a serious tension between the assimilationist preference that the majority wishes for minority members to adopt, and the integrationist position that the minority group themselves prefer. We conclude with a call to focus research efforts on how to balance the needs of the many and the few in pluralist and unequal societies.     

Respect the technique: Status-based respect increases minority group social cohesion with majority groups,while also increasing minority collective action tendencies

The present work explores the implications of respect for social change. Social change can be achieved via improved attitudes between minority and majority groups (i.e., social cohesion) or via action taken by minority groups (i.e., collective action). Recent work suggests that the social cohesion route to social change, in particular an emphasis on commonality, may be incompatible with the collective action route to social change. We suggest that social-cohesion strategies rooted in status-based respect may allow for social cohesion and collective action. We experimentally investigated the relative effects of a majority group communicating status-based respect and commonality, as compared to a control, on minority group members’ social cohesion with the majority group and willingness to engage in collective action. Status-based respect increased positive attitudes toward a majority group, relative to commonality and control, but was also associated with increased collective action tendencies. Implications for social change are discussed.     

Status protection in high status minority groups

The present study investigated the conditions under which group members try to obtain membership in another group, or are motivated to protect their group membership when they risk losing it. One hundred and twenty-nine high school students participated as subjects in a laboratory experiment. Subjects were divided into two groups, allegedly on the basis of their problem solving style. The relative size (minority/majority) and status position (high/low) of the subject's group, as well as the permeability of group boundaries (permeable/impermeable) were manipulated as independent variables in a 2×2×2 factorial design. The main dependent variables were the extent to which individuals valued their group membership, and identified with their group. The main results are that membership in a group with high status is considered more attractive than membership in a low status group, This differential evaluation of high and low status groups is more extreme in minority groups than in groups of majority size. Furthermore, when group boundaries are permeable, members of high status minorities show relatively strong ingroup identification, indicating a strengthening of ties with their own group when an alternative (majority) group affiliation is possible. However, our expectation that permeable group boundaries would result in diminished ingroup identification in low status minorities was not confirmed. Some additional data suggest that unsatisfactory membership in a low status group is resolved in a different way.     

With or without you: The paradoxical role of identification in predicting joint and ingroup collective action in intergroup conflict

While we have a rich understanding of the motivations of disadvantaged group members to act collectively with their group, especially the important role played by identification, we know less about the disadvantaged's motivations to engage in joint action with the advantaged. This research examines the role of identification in predicting joint and ingroup collective action in intergroup conflicts. Since joint action inherently diffuses the perception of “us versus them”, we propose that identification predicts ingroup action, but not joint action. We also examine conflict intensity as a moderator, and examine how changing identification is linked to change in support for joint action. We test these hypotheses in a three-wave longitudinal study in the Palestinian–Israeli conflict. Results support our hypotheses, demonstrating that identification positively predicts ingroup action but not necessarily joint action, and that when conflict intensifies, changes in identification are negatively related to joint action with outgroup members.     

Votes Without Power:Procedural Justice as Mutual Control in Majority-Minority Relations1

In an application of procedural justice theory (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler, 1989) to the domain of intergroup relations, we investigated justice preferences among members of numerical majority and minority groups as a function of two parameters: the number of representatives allotted to each group, and the decision rule used to determine the outcome (ranging from simple majority vote to unanimity). In the first study, minority group members perceived the combination of proportional representation and majority vote to be significantly less fair than all other combinations, and their choices of procedure stressed “mutual control” (when the decision rule exceeds the number of representatives possessed by either group). In a second study, majority group members perceived the combination of equal representation and majority vote to be significantly less fair than other procedures, but their choices of procedure did involve a considerable degree of mutual control. These findings suggest that there may be some basis for agreement between majority and minority group members' justice preferences and that both groups may perceive situations of mutual control to be acceptable. A third study involving both majority and minority group members ruled out an interpretation of the previous results in terms of motivation to maintain vs. change the status quo.     

Teaching in ethnically diverse classrooms: Examining individual differences in teacher self-efficacy

Using data of 40 native Dutch teachers and their native majority (n = 112) and ethnic minority students (n = 180), this study examined to what extent teachers experience differences in self-efficacy in teaching individual majority and minority students. We hypothesized that teachers would feel less self-efficacious in relation to ethnic minority students and that the difference in self-efficacy would be more pronounced when ethnic group differences are more salient (i.e., in the context of behavioral problems, ethnically less diverse classrooms, and for teachers with high ethnic identification). Our results show that teachers feel somewhat less self-efficacious with ethnic minority versus majority students. And, the difference in self-efficacy with minority versus majority students was more pronounced in relation to internalizing problem behaviors and somewhat more distinct in classrooms with relatively few ethnic minority students. The findings indicate the importance of a student specific assessment of teacher self-efficacy in diverse school contexts.     

When reasons matter: Quality of support affects reactions to increasing and consistent agreement

Evidence indicates that moving from a minority to a majority position has little impact on group identification. The present study investigated how reactions of former minorities and stable minorities to the group as a whole and their own faction were moderated by the quality of support they received for their position (genuine vs. superficial vs. unexplained). Former minorities identified more strongly with the group when others converted to their position for genuine than for superficial (or unexplained) reasons. The group identification of stable minorities did not vary as a function of the quality of support. Both former minorities and stable minorities identified more with their own faction when they received genuine than superficial (or unexplained) support. These findings clarify the important role of quality of support in group and faction identification. Moreover, they show that former minorities do identify with the group when they receive support they can trust.     

Minority influence: The role of argument refutation of the majority position and social support for the minority position

This study was conducted to determine the impact of social support for the minority position and the minority's argument refutation of the majority viewpoint. The results indicated that both the minority's refutation of majority arguments and majority defection to the minority position enhanced minority influence. Subjects changed more toward the minority position when the minority could refute the majority position than when the minority could not; the more arguments the minority refuted, the greater was minority influence. In addition, minority influence was a positive function of the number of the majority members who deserted to the minority position.     

Differences Between Minority,Majority, and Unanimous Group Members in the Communication of Information

This article integrates research on minority influence and information sampling in groups. The traditional information‐sampling paradigm implies that the discussion bias for common over unique information affects all types of groups universally. We proposed an alternative in which information sampling depends on the composition of opinions. We proposed that groups with a minority opinion may focus more on unique information and that a minority opinion may lead majority members to consider more preference‐inconsistent information. In a study that tested how minority, majority, and unanimous group members differ in their discussion of information, results lent no support for the alternative conception of information sampling. However, when the minority prevailed, minority members repeated significantly more common information than when the majority prevailed.     

Rejection as a call to arms: inter-racial hostility and support for political action as outcomes of race-based rejection in majority and minority groups

Both majority and minority group members fear race-based rejection, and respond by disparaging the groups that they expect will reject them. It is not clear, however, how this process differs in minority and majority groups. Using large representative samples of White (N= 4,618) and Māori (N= 1,163) New Zealanders, we found that perceptions of race-based rejection predicted outgroup negativity in both groups, but in different ways and for different reasons. For White (but not Māori) New Zealanders, increased intergroup anxiety partially mediated the relationship between cognitions of rejection and outgroup negativity. Māori who expected to be rejected on the basis of their race reported increased ethnic identification and, in part through this, increased support for political action benefiting their own group. This finding supports collective-action models of social change in historically disadvantaged minority groups.     

How positive and negative contact experiences relate to identification and acculturation of persons with a migration background: Differentiating between majority,minority, and religious group identity

Badea, Jetten, Iyer, and Er-Rafiy proposed a model that specifies immigrants’ experienced rejection by majority and minority groups and social identification with these groups as predictors of their acculturation attitudes. The present research tested an extended version of this model by assessing (i) both positive and negative contact experiences with majority and minority groups, (ii) social identification with these groups and religious groups, and (iii) acculturation attitudes. We surveyed individuals with Greek (N = 186) and Turkish (N = 138) migration background living in Germany. The proposed model yielded a good fit with the empirical data and showed that positive and negative contact with majority and minority groups predicted minority members’ acculturation attitudes, mediated via identification with the majority, minority, and religious group. Our findings support the extended model and contribute to a broader understanding of contact–identification–acculturation links in the context of migration.     

Social group salience and interethnic cooperation

This research was designed to test the adequacy of H. Tajfel's (1978, Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations, New York/London: Academic Press) theory of social identity for predicting cooperative behavior among members of ethnically mixed groups. Equally divided by sex, subjects were 24 Anglo-American and 24 Hispanic undergraduate students attending the University of California, Riverside. Subjects were exposed to cooperative and competitive feedback in four-member, same-sex groups which varied in the ratio of Anglo to Hispanic subjects to create two conditions—a 3 to 1 versus a 1 to 3 in-group to out-group composition. Results showed that members of both ethnic groups were equally cooperative when their own group was in the numerical majority (low-salience condition). In the high-salience condition, however, when their own group was in the numerical minority, Hispanic subjects were significantly more competitive than Anglo subjects. In addition, while Hispanics were significantly more competitive in the minority than in the majority condition, Anglos showed a slight tendency to be less competitive in the minority than in the majority condition. These results are discussed in light of social identity theory and its application to the study of interethnic cooperation/competition in heterogeneous groups.     

Urban district identity as a common ingroup identity: The different role of ingroup prototypicality for minority and majority groups

In this paper, we examined how identification with urban districts as a common ingroup identity and perceived ingroup prototypicality influence the attitudes of residents toward other ethnic groups in their neighborhood. The overall conclusion of two field studies (N = 214 and N = 98) is that for majority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification with an overarching identity and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as low in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 1 and 2). Conversely, for minority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as high in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 2). Outgroup prototypicality did not moderate the relation between identification and outgroup attitudes. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Minority goals for interaction with the majority: Seeking distance from the majority and the effect of rejection on identification

Four studies investigated the conditions under which minority group members respond to group‐based discrimination with increased identification with their group. We propose that minorities' interaction goals should serve as a moderator: seeking distance from the majority might keep minority identification alive in the face of perceived discrimination. These predictions were tested correlationally in Study 1 among Chinese immigrants in Australia (sample 1a) and children of rural migrant workers in a Chinese city (sample 1b). In Studies 2 and 3, perceived discrimination was manipulated among Romanian immigrants in France and Polish immigrants in Scotland. In Study 4, both minority goals and perceived discrimination were manipulated among a sample of international students in Australia. Results showed that only for those who were inclined to seek distance from the majority, minority group identification increased when discrimination was high compared with low. Discussion focuses on the way that seeking distance might be an important strategy for coping with discrimination. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.